Scott from The Controller Online writes: "Being a big fan of the Alternate History genre, and by extension the Assassin’s Creed series, I was excited to see that Ubisoft were creating an alternate, alternate, history in the first single player DLC for Assassin’s Creed 3. The Tyranny of King Washington supposes that George Washington set himself up as King of America, rather than helping to found the land of the free. Sounds like the beginning of a great story doesn’t it? Now, to find out how the first episode, titled Infamy, plays out."
(Assassin's Creed III, PC, PS3, Wii U, Xbox 360)
6/10

It was a waste , they strayed from the main game created some alternate world where certain people live & certain people cared. The only cool thing was Wolf Cloak everything else feels like it was thrown together, being held by it's name hopefully the next so called chapter turns out better. if not they may as well save their money & use it on AC4

I'm really curious to hear what you were expecting it to be. I bought the season pass and am in no way feeling ripped off. Though I am a big fan of the series, so players who are just looking for more guards to kill probably won't be too keen on it.

Not too sure what the reviewer means by "The story didn't advance enough" either. It was the first of three episodes. Were all the mysteries supposed to be resolved already?

It's also got a few goodies to dig around for after you complete the five or so missions you're given (such as lucid memory fragments and a flashback scene). Knocking off four whole points just because the reviewer only played the story missions seems a little harsh...

I think the idea of alternate history missions... inside of ACs alternate history... is a good one, but not for AC3. There's simply too much of the Revolutionary War proper, and Connor's story itself, that is too noticeably absent form Assassin's Creed 3.